On topic, I would have done quite nicely on this election but unfortunately got trapped in the Clinton ECVs market on Betfair which wasn't very liquid, I couldn't cash out, and I just got stuck in it: wiping out most of my winnings.
I got to -647 on Betfair, realised something didn't quite smell right at 1.13 and reversed it to +980 odd on Trump. I changed a 1000 lay at 1.13 to 500, bit annoyed with myself for doing that.
Side bets should pay for the modest SPIN losses (£15/pt Hillary sub 250) and I think I've won on turnout too.
Dipping into this Trey Gowdy chap (thanks Plato). In a John Grisham book the insurance company write to the mother of a cancer victim claiming health insurance that she must be "stupid, stupid, stupid".
Here is an example of an MIT Professor being caught out saying that US people must be stupid, stupid to swallow Obamacare statements. http://tinyurl.com/obnbbya
ObamaCare is a complete crock. Its a deliberately concocted scheme designed to fail and result in single payer i.e. socialised medicine.
Many for just Bronze cover are paying as much a month as their mortgage payment - and have deductables [the bit they have to pay before claims are paid] of thousands of dollars.
It's health insurance you can't use and bleeds you dry. The youngsters are paying the fine rather than get a plan.
Trump's ideas for cross state insurance sales et al are much better.
On topic, I would have done quite nicely on this election but unfortunately got trapped in the Clinton ECVs market on Betfair which wasn't very liquid, I couldn't cash out, and I just got stuck in it: wiping out most of my winnings.
I got to -647 on Betfair, realised something didn't quite smell right at 1.13 and reversed it to +980 odd on Trump. I changed a 1000 lay at 1.13 to 500, bit annoyed with myself for doing that.
Side bets should pay for the modest SPIN losses (£15/pt Hillary sub 250) and I think I've won on turnout too.
It seems I missed all the fun last night. It looks as though it would have been a fantastic election to be live-betting on and now I'm feeling sulky about that.
Well done to @PlatoSays for sticking to her guns under fire. Unlike almost all of the other Trumpers, she did not seek to distance herself from the object of her admiration and she never disappeared when things looked bleak for her man.
Those Leave supporters who are appalled by Donald Trump's election might wish to reflect on that feeling at their leisure. You can't separate the victory from the manner of the victory. That was true of the EU referendum and it will be true of Donald Trump's presidency.
Rarely has a man appeared so unworthy of the hopes vested in him by those who voted for him, but they can't say they weren't warned. Once again, it may very well be that those voters who most enthusiastically voted for him that will be most completely shafted by the consequences.
And sadly, the continent we live in is a much less safe place at the end of 2016 than it started it.
You have zero evidence for your last assertion. Trumps foreign policy statements have been relatively consistent - aggressive defensively but relatively non-interventionist internationally. Hillary was a died-in-the-wool hawk. The former appears to me (and surely to most people applying logic) to be by far the safer option. To believe otherwise is to believe that America's constant foreign campaigns have made us safer, which is a patently absurd stance.
The new foreign policy (provided it is carried through) is quite timely for where the US is now. It has echoes of Stalin's 'Socialism in one country' as opposed to Lenin's previous 'Permanent revolution'. The former was a policy of essentially building a wall around the USSR, rather than the system being dependent on other countries consistently toppling in its favour. And of course it managed to keep the USSR in place for another 50 years. An America less interested in worldwide meddling and more interested in its backyard can in my book only be a good thing.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
But that's the point about this political atmosphere - rationality plays absolutely no part. People want to adore their hero so much that his unacceptable pronouncements are ignored, excused and in some cases even subsumed. The desire to be part of the movement is all powerful; its edicts are irrelevant.
It looks fairly awful. One carriage looks as though it's partially on the rails; the other is on its side, either before or after a sharp bend / junction.
RAIB's going to be busy.
Looks like its at the junction where the lines to new Addington and Beckenham diverge. Runs down a ramp into a cutting where the old Addiscombe branch used to run, with sharp 90 degree turns onto the old formation. Looks like the Tram has come off the track on the points at the junction.
Thanks - I'm not familiar with Tramlink. As well as working out what happened (split points or overspeed?), RAIB will be looking very carefully at how the fatalities happened and what can be done to prevent them in future.
From memory, this is the first such crash on a 'modern' tram system. There have been plenty of collisions with pedestrians and cars, but this may well be the first self-inflicted tram crash of this sort.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.
On topic, I would have done quite nicely on this election but unfortunately got trapped in the Clinton ECVs market on Betfair which wasn't very liquid, I couldn't cash out, and I just got stuck in it: wiping out most of my winnings.
I got to -647 on Betfair, realised something didn't quite smell right at 1.13 and reversed it to +980 odd on Trump. I changed a 1000 lay at 1.13 to 500, bit annoyed with myself for doing that.
Side bets should pay for the modest SPIN losses (£15/pt Hillary sub 250) and I think I've won on turnout too.
Could have won more, but might have lost a wodge.
What turnout band are you on?
58-62 with cover to 0 on the one below.
What IS turnout ?
I reckon it might be the one below.. check Betfair too..
It seems I missed all the fun last night. It looks as though it would have been a fantastic election to be live-betting on and now I'm feeling sulky about that.
Well done to @PlatoSays for sticking to her guns under fire. Unlike almost all of the other Trumpers, she did not seek to distance herself from the object of her admiration and she never disappeared when things looked bleak for her man.
Those Leave supporters who are appalled by Donald Trump's election might wish to reflect on that feeling at their leisure. You can't separate the victory from the manner of the victory. That was true of the EU referendum and it will be true of Donald Trump's presidency.
Rarely has a man appeared so unworthy of the hopes vested in him by those who voted for him, but they can't say they weren't warned. Once again, it may very well be that those voters who most enthusiastically voted for him that will be most completely shafted by the consequences.
And sadly, the continent we live in is a much less safe place at the end of 2016 than it started it.
You have zero evidence for your last assertion. Trumps foreign policy statements have been relatively consistent - aggressive defensively but relatively non-interventionist internationally. Hillary was a died-in-the-wool hawk. The former appears to me (and surely to most people applying logic) to be by far the safer option. To believe otherwise is to believe that America's constant foreign campaigns have made us safer, which is a patently absurd stance.
The new foreign policy (provided it is carried through) is quite timely for where the US is now. It has echoes of Stalin's 'Socialism in one country' as opposed to Lenin's previous 'Permanent revolution'. The former was a policy of essentially building a wall around the USSR, rather than the system being dependent on other countries consistently toppling in its favour. And of course it managed to keep the USSR in place for another 50 years. An America less interested in worldwide meddling and more interested in its backyard can in my book only be a good thing.
For decades now, before he got into politics, Trump has been complaining about foreign countries relying on Uncle Sam (and his nukes). There's a reason Putin wanted the isolationist candidate to win. It is one thing to hope for an end to Middle Eastern adventures but Estonians will not be sleeping more easily tonight, and Japanese will be worried by China's shiny new stealth fighters.
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Stein still a 1.0%? Are we going to get clarification on that one?
Currently at 0.954%
But that is just taking the headline figures from Fox. She will actaully be fractionally lower due to write ins and the like that are not gathered under the 5 candidates that Fox lists.
On the other hand, remaining votes appear to be in states where she is on the ballot. Could be close.
Yes, I'm bricking it, she's been slowly creeping upwards.
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
But that's the point about this political atmosphere - rationality plays absolutely no part. People want to adore their hero so much that his unacceptable pronouncements are ignored, excused and in some cases even subsumed. The desire to be part of the movement is all powerful; its edicts are irrelevant.
A left wing populist could well win, but he would have to be seen as a patriot by the voters. Corbyn isn't.
On topic, I would have done quite nicely on this election but unfortunately got trapped in the Clinton ECVs market on Betfair which wasn't very liquid, I couldn't cash out, and I just got stuck in it: wiping out most of my winnings.
I got to -647 on Betfair, realised something didn't quite smell right at 1.13 and reversed it to +980 odd on Trump. I changed a 1000 lay at 1.13 to 500, bit annoyed with myself for doing that.
Side bets should pay for the modest SPIN losses (£15/pt Hillary sub 250) and I think I've won on turnout too.
Could have won more, but might have lost a wodge.
What turnout band are you on?
58-62 with cover to 0 on the one below.
What IS turnout ?
Not sure - the NYT has it at 58,900,000 each which (although there are some more votes to come) seems to be well down on 2012 where Obama won 66,000,000 to 61,000,000 (figures approx DYOR)
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I first suspected this would be the case when my wife voted late last week - for Trump. I was totally gobsmacked. Had thought she would go Johnson. But her desire for it not to be Hillary overcame her resistance and she held her nose.
She is not happy with the result, but still relieved it is not Her.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.
It seems I missed all the fun last night. It looks as though it would have been a fantastic election to be live-betting on and now I'm feeling sulky about that.
Well done to @PlatoSays for sticking to her guns under fire. Unlike almost all of the other Trumpers, she did not seek to distance herself from the object of her admiration and she never disappeared when things looked bleak for her man.
Those Leave supporters who are appalled by Donald Trump's election might wish to reflect on that feeling at their leisure. You can't separate the victory from the manner of the victory. That was true of the EU referendum and it will be true of Donald Trump's presidency.
Rarely has a man appeared so unworthy of the hopes vested in him by those who voted for him, but they can't say they weren't warned. Once again, it may very well be that those voters who most enthusiastically voted for him that will be most completely shafted by the consequences.
And sadly, the continent we live in is a much less safe place at the end of 2016 than it started it.
You have zero evidence for your last assertion. Trumps foreign policy statements have been relatively consistent - aggressive defensively but relatively non-interventionist internationally. Hillary was a died-in-the-wool hawk. The former appears to me (and surely to most people applying logic) to be by far the safer option. To believe otherwise is to believe that America's constant foreign campaigns have made us safer, which is a patently absurd stance.
The new foreign policy (provided it is carried through) is quite timely for where the US is now. It has echoes of Stalin's 'Socialism in one country' as opposed to Lenin's previous 'Permanent revolution'. The former was a policy of essentially building a wall around the USSR, rather than the system being dependent on other countries consistently toppling in its favour. And of course it managed to keep the USSR in place for another 50 years. An America less interested in worldwide meddling and more interested in its backyard can in my book only be a good thing.
That's because you think Putin is a good thing. You once claimed to be a historian: perhaps you ought to look at Putin's past actions wrt his neighbours to understand why Mr Meeks is correct.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
But that's the point about this political atmosphere - rationality plays absolutely no part. People want to adore their hero so much that his unacceptable pronouncements are ignored, excused and in some cases even subsumed. The desire to be part of the movement is all powerful; its edicts are irrelevant.
A left wing populist could well win, but he would have to be seen as a patriot by the voters. Corbyn isn't.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
But that's the point about this political atmosphere - rationality plays absolutely no part. People want to adore their hero so much that his unacceptable pronouncements are ignored, excused and in some cases even subsumed. The desire to be part of the movement is all powerful; its edicts are irrelevant.
A left wing populist could well win, but he would have to be seen as a patriot by the voters. Corbyn isn't.
Someone like Dan Jarvis might have done it. But Corbyn? Can you see Corbyn wearing a Union Jack lapel pin and campaigning under the slogan 'Make Britain Great again'?
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?
Clinton's unfortunate. She beat Obama in the popular vote too, but lost.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It's frightening. We're now seriously discussing the Western democratic alliance tearing itself apart, as the Russian and Chinese dictatorships gleefully look on. And there are some on here positively delighting in this outcome.
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I don't get the whole Dem or Republican pollster thing - surely each pollster should attempt to seek the "truth" ?
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?
Clinton's unfortunate. She beat Obama in the popular vote too, but lost.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
Trump looked like he was making an effort, Hillary's rallies (What rallies) were terribly attended.
Except the last one, but that was a free concert !
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It's frightening. We're now seriously discussing the Western democratic alliance tearing itself apart, as the Russian and Chinese dictatorships gleefully look on. And there are some on here positively delighting in this outcome.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
snip
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
snip
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
Does this sound familiar though?:
"The sham democracy and the chaos in Chicago led to the creation of the McGovern-Fraser Commission, which reformed the Democrats’ nominating process, weakening the Party bosses and strengthening women, minorities, young people, and single-issue activists. In Thomas Frank’s recent book, “Listen, Liberal,” he describes the result: “The McGovern Commission reforms seemed to be populist, but their effect was to replace one group of party insiders with another—in this case, to replace leaders of workers’ organizations with affluent professionals.”
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
Or bridging between the two.
If a bridge can be built, chances are that they could do it themselves. If it can't, no thanks will go to those that tried to mediate and quite probably some blame would be attached.
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?
Clinton's unfortunate. She beat Obama in the popular vote too, but lost.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
To have a good ground game, the first rule is the candidate needs to be on the right ground.
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It's frightening. We're now seriously discussing the Western democratic alliance tearing itself apart, as the Russian and Chinese dictatorships gleefully look on. And there are some on here positively delighting in this outcome.
Our leaders have no one to blame but themselves.
Yeah - and they are the only ones who will suffer if it all goes pear-shaped.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
And yet he has tapped something and is doing better than other left wing politicians. We'd be better off trying to understand it than to dismiss it.
The left in Spain has over 40% of the vote. Our FPTP system means Labour is the only game in town in England. As I say, Corbyn has tapped into a relatively small, relatively well off demographic and that supports him enthusiastically. Beyond this, though, every single indication is that he is utterly toxic.
And yet in a better position than other left wing politicians - which have acquired a new form of toxicity that trumps the traditional factors you cite. We need to understand it.
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Which other left wing politicians? The ones that operate within a PR voting system where it is possible for the centre left and the hard left to exist in different parties? He is as far from power as Hollande is from re-election.
I am not saying that Corbyn does not have weaknesses. We bang about them all the time. The point is that he also has strengths. His outsider status, like Trump, allows him to overcome some of the problems that in normal days would have made him beyond the pale.
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
He has strengths among people inhabiting a relatively small demographic. His manifest weaknesses preclude him from expanding that demographic.
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?
Clinton's unfortunate. She beat Obama in the popular vote too, but lost.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
Trump looked like he was making an effort, Hillary's rallies (What rallies) were terribly attended.
Except the last one, but that was a free concert !
Did she even do her own rallies?
On more than one occasion it looked like *insert celebrity here* had invited their great aunt on stage at the end of a gig.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.
May's goal in Brexit is to ensure whatever she gets is enough for her party to be happy with, so that they are united come any fight with Labour.
I know a fair few feminists, and talk to them a great deal - enough to realise there are as many different strands of feminism as there are of any other ism. But with two exceptions they were all for Hilary. Her deficiencies could be ignored for the advantage of having a female president.
I pointed out that she might well be the *wrong* candidate: that her becoming President would have little to do with feminism and more to do with her husband's position and record than fighting a supposedly misogynistic system.
Why is this a major setback for feminism? Because the first female candidate with a realistic chance of becoming president has utterly failed. Any other female candidate would automatically be compared to Clinton, and suffer for the comparison. It also has not eased the progression path for women to reach the top, which Hilary somewhat bypassed. Heck, even Palin's better in that regard, despite her manifest faults.
I don't expect the reds or blues to pick another female presidential candidate for three or four elections.
Does make a mockery of the Electoral College somewhat imho – could it be dumped for something else, or is it set in aspic by the US constitution?
Clinton's unfortunate. She beat Obama in the popular vote too, but lost.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
To have a good ground game, the first rule is the candidate needs to be on the right ground.
Yes.. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/trump-clinton-electoral-college/506306/ "...By contrast, the campaign has devoted very little advertising or time from Clinton and her top surrogates in several of the states that are part of her core strategy for reaching 270 Electoral College votes—among them Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Virginia, and New Mexico..."
I agree that the phenomena of Brexit and Trump have created an atmosphere in which someone like Corbyn could thrive. Yes, he's trailing in the polls now, but then so was Leave by big margins a few years ago. It would be a telling irony if the populist, illiberal fervour that the British hard-Right are glorying in at present resulted in a Trotskyist government here. But that's what happens when you play games with dark forces.
Takeaway Corbyn's belief in open door immigration, his support for the IRA and other anti-British terrorist groups, his backing for winding-up NATO, his opposition to Trident and his opposition to the monarchy and that may well be the case.
But that's the point about this political atmosphere - rationality plays absolutely no part. People want to adore their hero so much that his unacceptable pronouncements are ignored, excused and in some cases even subsumed. The desire to be part of the movement is all powerful; its edicts are irrelevant.
A left wing populist could well win, but he would have to be seen as a patriot by the voters. Corbyn isn't.
Exactly - Corbyn cannot even begin to have a conversation with ordinary voters because he does not share any of their core values. But to be fair to him, he is not even interested in reaching out in the first place.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
The EU is predicted on voters within it, and outwith it, not voting to upset the apple cart of the established order.
Juncker wasn't joking when he said there could be no choice against the European treaties: the ways he sees it, there isn't.
After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Sorry, but I'm irritated by this endless talk or 'WCC' and 'little people' blah, blah, blah. It's increasingly becoming the ideal cloak with which the unscrupulous can hide their divisive, intolerant and quasi-fascist leanings.
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.
The chaos in the EU will create the conditions for dramatic changes including recognising the UK as an independent Nation freely trading within and without the EU.
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I first suspected this would be the case when my wife voted late last week - for Trump. I was totally gobsmacked. Had thought she would go Johnson. But her desire for it not to be Hillary overcame her resistance and she held her nose.
She is not happy with the result, but still relieved it is not Her.
I think a lot of people concluded getting some change (even if it risks being awful) is better than absolutely no change.
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It's frightening. We're now seriously discussing the Western democratic alliance tearing itself apart, as the Russian and Chinese dictatorships gleefully look on. And there are some on here positively delighting in this outcome.
Is anyone "seriously discussing" that except for you and a few other fringe voices?
Sky Europe commentator saying that the European Leaders are grealy concerned as the win by Trump has been widely welcomed by all the rightist movements in Europe and there is a real chance that this anti EU sentiment will seriously damage the EU.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
Not really, May's goal in Brexit is to be a global champion of free trade. That is not going to end well with everyone going protectionist and isolationist.
May's goal in Brexit is to ensure whatever she gets is enough for her party to be happy with, so that they are united come any fight with Labour.
Spot on - May always puts her career, and therefore her party, above the needs of the country.
He has strengths among people inhabiting a relatively small demographic. His manifest weaknesses preclude him from expanding that demographic.
And yet he is stronger than any UK left wing pol right now. So we have to understand things.
My hunch is that, whilst he might not win he would outperform a conventional left-of-centre candidate in a suit. Owen Smith, or any of them, would have lost.
The question is, is there a route back by taking some of that undeniable Corbyn Maverick magic and marrying it to a programme with broader appeal and a state-of-the-art campaign machine.
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I first suspected this would be the case when my wife voted late last week - for Trump. I was totally gobsmacked. Had thought she would go Johnson. But her desire for it not to be Hillary overcame her resistance and she held her nose.
She is not happy with the result, but still relieved it is not Her.
I think a lot of people concluded getting some change (even if it risks being awful) is better than absolutely no change.
I certainly wonder in certain parts of America if the language wasn't as offensive as the media thought.
I'm not saying people like it or approve of it, but if they want a wrecking ball to change Washington and politics the fact that it is foul mouthed might not be negative. i.e. The worse he is the bigger a change there will be.
People who voted with a strong dislike of both candidates went Trump 2:1 over Hillary - the opposite of what Dem pollsters were expecting.
I first suspected this would be the case when my wife voted late last week - for Trump. I was totally gobsmacked. Had thought she would go Johnson. But her desire for it not to be Hillary overcame her resistance and she held her nose.
She is not happy with the result, but still relieved it is not Her.
I think a lot of people concluded getting some change (even if it risks being awful) is better than absolutely no change.
One assumes as some sort of political chemo.
Most doctors turn down chemo if they have cancer...
That's net +4410 for Obama, or 44.5% to 55.5%. Trump needs over 49.6% of the vote in the remaining towns to win, a swing of 5.1% relative to 2012.
The biparty vote share in 2012 was 47.2% to 52.8%, and Trump is now 47.5% to 47.4%, so his swing so far is only 2.8%.
It's not impossible for Trump to win New Hampshire, but the odds are not good.
That looks to depend pretty much entirely on Keene, which sounds like the high-percentage-white, post-manufacturing town where Trump has done very well. I'd be cautious.
And that will see the EU in all kinds of problems including trade, defence and Brexit.
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
I'm trying to remember how it panned out the last time a German leader tried to stand up against the US and UK in global leadership..
We haven't decided (or even worked out) which side we are on yet, if any.
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It's frightening. We're now seriously discussing the Western democratic alliance tearing itself apart, as the Russian and Chinese dictatorships gleefully look on. And there are some on here positively delighting in this outcome.
Indeed. (*) In many cases, these are the same people who talked about 'British values' in the run-up to the referendum ...
It looks fairly awful. One carriage looks as though it's partially on the rails; the other is on its side, either before or after a sharp bend / junction.
RAIB's going to be busy.
Looks like its at the junction where the lines to new Addington and Beckenham diverge. Runs down a ramp into a cutting where the old Addiscombe branch used to run, with sharp 90 degree turns onto the old formation. Looks like the Tram has come off the track on the points at the junction.
That sounds right. I used to live near Sandilands and it's a very sharp curve.
It seems I missed all the fun last night. It looks as though it would have been a fantastic election to be live-betting on and now I'm feeling sulky about that.
Well done to @PlatoSays for sticking to her guns under fire. Unlike almost all of the other Trumpers, she did not seek to distance herself from the object of her admiration and she never disappeared when things looked bleak for her man.
Those Leave supporters who are appalled by Donald Trump's election might wish to reflect on that feeling at their leisure. You can't separate the victory from the manner of the victory. That was true of the EU referendum and it will be true of Donald Trump's presidency.
Rarely has a man appeared so unworthy of the hopes vested in him by those who voted for him, but they can't say they weren't warned. Once again, it may very well be that those voters who most enthusiastically voted for him that will be most completely shafted by the consequences.
And sadly, the continent we live in is a much less safe place at the end of 2016 than it started it.
You have zero evidence for your last assertion. Trumps foreign policy statements have been relatively consistent - aggressive defensively but relatively non-interventionist internationally. Hillary was a died-in-the-wool hawk. The former appears to me (and surely to most people applying logic) to be by far the safer option. To believe otherwise is to believe that America's constant foreign campaigns have made us safer, which is a patently absurd stance.
The new foreign policy (provided it is carried through) is quite timely for where the US is now. It has echoes of Stalin's 'Socialism in one country' as opposed to Lenin's previous 'Permanent revolution'. The former was a policy of essentially building a wall around the USSR, rather than the system being dependent on other countries consistently toppling in its favour. And of course it managed to keep the USSR in place for another 50 years. An America less interested in worldwide meddling and more interested in its backyard can in my book only be a good thing.
I presume the 'continent we live in' means Europe. Given Trump's comments on NATO that doesn't seem unreasonable...
After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
After saying for nearly a year that Trump would win, and never having won a bet backing Clinton, I wibbled at about 1am this morning and moved my entire position over to Clinton at 1.15. After being on Trump at 8s. I cashed out a painful spread on Florida too. Idiot.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
Argh.
What you needed to do was not back Clinton @ 1.15 at 1am - and then not cashout your painful Florida spread. Also, you should have remembered to flip the bets on Trump taking MI & PA.
Comments
Trump is very anti EU and he has his best mate Nigel meeting him on Saturday.
Expect Nigel to be re-energised and direct his increasing influence against the EU
1. Stupid
2. Dangerous
It was a Democrat President that took the USA into Vietnam...
Many for just Bronze cover are paying as much a month as their mortgage payment - and have deductables [the bit they have to pay before claims are paid] of thousands of dollars.
It's health insurance you can't use and bleeds you dry. The youngsters are paying the fine rather than get a plan.
Trump's ideas for cross state insurance sales et al are much better.
What IS turnout ?
But if only he could stick to the future, where he's very good, and keep away from the past, he wouldn't have ended up banned...
The new foreign policy (provided it is carried through) is quite timely for where the US is now. It has echoes of Stalin's 'Socialism in one country' as opposed to Lenin's previous 'Permanent revolution'. The former was a policy of essentially building a wall around the USSR, rather than the system being dependent on other countries consistently toppling in its favour. And of course it managed to keep the USSR in place for another 50 years. An America less interested in worldwide meddling and more interested in its backyard can in my book only be a good thing.
her judgement has been wildly off of late
From memory, this is the first such crash on a 'modern' tram system. There have been plenty of collisions with pedestrians and cars, but this may well be the first self-inflicted tram crash of this sort.
WTF
New Statesman ✔ @NewStatesman
What does the market's reaction to a President Trump tell us about America's future? http://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2016/11/what-does-markets-reaction-president-trump-tell-us-about-americas-future …
If Trump follows through some of his election promises, it would be hard for the UK to side with them. And yes, that might mean siding with Germany and the EU ...
It seems better to be a Maverick than part of the Elite.
Damn, another myth busted.
She is not happy with the result, but still relieved it is not Her.
AHA https://t.co/D6DYh5fphP
It would require something an order of magnitude stranger than the Trumpening to pass the required constitutional amendment, I think.
It does show that all the talk of her brilliant ground game was rubbish. She got votes where they were of no use to her, and fell short where she needed them.
The EU are going to pay the price of not listening to little people and this is all good for Brexit
We need to understand that. It is possible IMO to develop a centre left approach that is compatible with being an outsider. After all, that is what left wing politics has been for most of the C20.
Tamworth 718/843 (Obama +125)
Easton 63/122 (Obama +59)
Surry 219/270 (Obama +51)
Nottingham 1379/1364 (Obama -15)
Washington 314/285 (Obama -29)
Middleton 439/416 (Obama -23)
Litchfield 2703/1956 (Obama -747)
Sutton 545/654 (Obama +109)
Orford 239/455 (Obama +216)
Woodstock 307/456 (Obama +149)
Loudon 1546/1414 (Obama -132)
Newton 1395/1104 (Obama -291)
Stratford 105/167 (Obama + 62)
Milford 3787/3954 (Obama +167)
Keene 3613/8718 (Obama +5105)
New Castle 419/396 (Obama - 23)
That's net +4410 for Obama, or 44.5% to 55.5%. Trump needs over 49.6% of the vote in the remaining towns to win, a swing of 5.1% relative to 2012.
The biparty vote share in 2012 was 47.2% to 52.8%, and Trump is now 47.5% to 47.4%, so his swing so far is only 2.8%.
It's not impossible for Trump to win New Hampshire, but the odds are not good.
Except the last one, but that was a free concert !
A: Zero as I put nothing on either Clinton or Trump.
Now have just received a text from 20+ yr old son about his first bet ... on Trump.... and is £2,000 richer!
Laugh, cry, worry about his future?
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/politics/opinion-polls/news/80653/blow-jeremy-corbyn-elderly-labour-voters-prefer-theresa
If so Corbyn isn't doing well again.
"The sham democracy and the chaos in Chicago led to the creation of the McGovern-Fraser Commission, which reformed the Democrats’ nominating process, weakening the Party bosses and strengthening women, minorities, young people, and single-issue activists. In Thomas Frank’s recent book, “Listen, Liberal,” he describes the result: “The McGovern Commission reforms seemed to be populist, but their effect was to replace one group of party insiders with another—in this case, to replace leaders of workers’ organizations with affluent professionals.”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/hillary-clinton-and-the-populist-revolt
DOUBLE IT.
And FWIW - in the UK The Tories can win the popular vote and Labour become the government (well that was the case) - did you complain?
To change it, you'd need a majority of 2/3rd in both the House & the Senate, and then ratification by 3/4ths of all States.
On more than one occasion it looked like *insert celebrity here* had invited their great aunt on stage at the end of a gig.
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/forecast/president
(Waits for people to stop laughing).
I know a fair few feminists, and talk to them a great deal - enough to realise there are as many different strands of feminism as there are of any other ism. But with two exceptions they were all for Hilary. Her deficiencies could be ignored for the advantage of having a female president.
I pointed out that she might well be the *wrong* candidate: that her becoming President would have little to do with feminism and more to do with her husband's position and record than fighting a supposedly misogynistic system.
Why is this a major setback for feminism? Because the first female candidate with a realistic chance of becoming president has utterly failed. Any other female candidate would automatically be compared to Clinton, and suffer for the comparison. It also has not eased the progression path for women to reach the top, which Hilary somewhat bypassed. Heck, even Palin's better in that regard, despite her manifest faults.
I don't expect the reds or blues to pick another female presidential candidate for three or four elections.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/trump-clinton-electoral-college/506306/
"...By contrast, the campaign has devoted very little advertising or time from Clinton and her top surrogates in several of the states that are part of her core strategy for reaching 270 Electoral College votes—among them Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Virginia, and New Mexico..."
Juncker wasn't joking when he said there could be no choice against the European treaties: the ways he sees it, there isn't.
Luckily I managed to get out and then back on to Trump at 5, and had been suspended out of some spreads which came in (e.g. PA). I'd also forgotten to flip bets on Trump taking MI and PA.
Overall, ending up about £180-240 up on the night. Not hugely impressed with my performance.
We have overnight become a much sought after partner especially in defence capabilities which will concentrate minds in the Baltic Nations and throughout the EU. Big bargaining tool
One assumes as some sort of political chemo.
My hunch is that, whilst he might not win he would outperform a conventional left-of-centre candidate in a suit. Owen Smith, or any of them, would have lost.
The question is, is there a route back by taking some of that undeniable Corbyn Maverick magic and marrying it to a programme with broader appeal and a state-of-the-art campaign machine.
(*) Sorry!
I thought only we (brazilians) were capable of electing such idiots to government.
It seems, I was wrong. I feel depressed. We had the worst local elections ever, an impeached president, and now this...
Given Trump's comments on NATO that doesn't seem unreasonable...
It's rigged I tell you, it's rigged.
What you needed to do was not back Clinton @ 1.15 at 1am - and then not cashout your painful Florida spread. Also, you should have remembered to flip the bets on Trump taking MI & PA.
Hope that helps.